Dec 8, 2012 9:00am PST
. it decided to take these two, doma and proposition 8. why do you think they took these and not others? >> you know, after this election, this issue is so ripe for the supreme court the jurisdictions are so split in their laws, many states recognizing same-sex marriage and performing same-sex marriages. some states not recognizing them. this is the perfect scenario for the supreme court to step in and ultimately make a ruling. there are over 1,000 cases, joe, in which federal laws are impacted by marital status. the time has come. it's ripe. prop 8 was on the doorstep for the supreme court. here we go. >> avery, we were trading e-mails a little bit a while ago. one of the questions i asked you was whether the supreme court essentially gave itself an emergency escape hatch with one of the cases it chose. can you talk about that? >> late yesterday, as you know, joe, the supreme court amended its grant of review when it said, we want to know about the issue of standing. meaning does the person involved in the challenge have the right to be there in the first place. if the court doesn't then what
Dec 3, 2012 8:00am PST
a decision that's down the road. there's a variety of different ways they could decide on doma. you know, they don't have to decide on equal protection grounds but the narrow question of benefits or certain benefits or certain tax breaks that married people who happen to be same sex should get or shouldn't get. so, there's a whole range of ways they could consider this. it doesn't mean they're just going to go in and determine that a law against same-sex marriage is illegal discrimination. there are a lot of other things they can do with it. >> benefits are one thing. recognition and allowance is another thing. here's the other thing. it is real hard to get breaking material and information out of the supreme court before they're ready to give it but on occasion good connections yield something and yet a lock-up in terms of what they might do with prop 8 and doma. >> yeah. that's true. but you have to remember, on these big, sweeping social issues that the court has decided throughout history, desegregation of public schools comes to mind, brown versus the board of education, that sat on
Dec 8, 2012 2:00pm PST
, one regarding the defense of marriage act, or doma, involving couples legally married in their own state. the other is a challenge to california's prop 8, which took away the rates of same-sex marriage that had been previously approved by state courts. >>> the top story this hour, a man considered the leader of a terrorist network, now in custody in egypt. this is why we're paying attention to this man. u.s. officials believe his group had something to do with the attack in libya that killed the american ambassador and three other u.s. citizens. our national correspondent, susan candiotti is live for us. you have been working your sources. what do we know about this terror suspect and the group he leads? >> well, let's talk about him. the investigators have had this man on the radar for some time. and now he is being called a possible suspect in the benghazi attacks. muhammad ahmad was arrested, in custody while the investigation goes on. u.s. authorities believe he been involved in the september terror hit that killed ambassador chris stevens and three other americans, according t
Dec 7, 2012 9:00am PST
early next year. in fact, ten cases related to the federal defense of marriage act, or doma and proposition 8 are pending against supreme court justices right now. at least one of them is going to make it to their docket. we could find out which one today about early next week or so. i'm joined by our legal analyst jeffrey tubin. remind us what are the court's oping whz it comes to marriage equality, and the differences here between doma and prop 8. >> well, defense of marriage act -- defense of marriage act was signed by president clinton in 1996, and it's a law that says the federal government, all as pecks of the federal government, including the internal revenue service will not recognize same-sex marriages even many states where same-sex marriage is legal and two appeals courts have held that that is unconstitutional, that it is unlawful discrimination. the obama administration agrees that this law is unconstitutional. it's now being defended by a lawyer hired by the house of representatives, and the case about is the defense of marriage act constitutional, that is one.